<VV> Another slam on Corvair.

[ScottyGrover at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/27/06 5:44:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
s_debaker at yahoo.com writes:



Corvair wasn't particularly innovative, but it didn't need to  be innovative 
to be an interesting and worthwhile car. It stands on what  it is. Even 
taken in the narrow context of the U.S. auto business, it  didn't break any 
new ground in chassis construction. In the worldwide  view, it didn't do 
much new at all. Many unitized-body vehicles were built  before it -- 
Citroen (Traction Avant), Lancia, and Chrysler Corp.  (Airflows) were using 
this style of construction before WWII, and even the  Vespa motor scooter 
was using a unitized body-frame in the 1940's. The  Austin/Morris Mini came 
out before the Corvair, and it was unitized. The  rear-engine format was 
certainly not new -- KdF (Volkswagen), Tatra,  Porsche, FIAT, et al. had 
used it earlier.



Wasn't the original Lincoln Zephyr of the late '30's also unit  construction?
Scotty